I like how truthers talk about the controlled demolition of two 100+ story buildings like it's a quick and easy exercise that only requires a few days for all of the necessary explosives to be planted. Any credible engineer would tell you that even if you had people working around the clock it would take six months at a minimum for all explosives to be planted.
This also brings up the point of how the gubbamint was able to include so many construction workers in a staged attack without any leaks
Can someone also explain why it was necessary to stage a demolition after the planes already hit? Anyone on a floor above where the planes hit died almost instantaneously, which would have made it a horrific attack even without any controlled demolition. Is the truther angle that it wouldn't have been a bad enough attack for Americans to support a war unless the buildings completely fell?
Usually, that's when it suddenly expands into a Jewish insurance scam.
That's always my favorite part of the 9/11 argument. Some of these truthers make it seem like something that complex could be pulled off in days.
This also brings up the point of how the gubbamint was able to include so many construction workers in a staged attack without any leaks
To plant that many explosives needed to cut critical load-bearing steel beams and concrete pillars....I would guess the number would be in tens of thousands of charges. I think the 6 months you mentioned is the best case scenario. It would take a team of a hundred construction workers sneaking explosives into the Twin Towers everyday for 6 months....without anyone getting caught. Yeah, sure.
Which is also hilarious, because from my understanding, the insurance payout was nothing compared to the cost of building the Towers.
"But, but, why would he get terrorism insurance at all before 9/11?" the Twoofers ask. Well, the WTC had already been bombed a few years before 9/11, so Silverstein thought it'd probably be a good idea to get insured in case it ever happened again.
Yeah the engineer interviews I've seen said that doing it in six months would have been possible but only as a best case scenario if there was a crew working at full capacity around the clock with nothing getting delayed or going wrong. This means there would have needed to be at least 300 construction workers, or 100 per shift. That's 300 construction workers, plus however many demolitions experts, engineers, architects, etc. that job would require, and they would all need to be "in on it" so they keep their mouth shut.
Actually, the main point of my posts is that when you waive scientific studies as the basis for your reasoning, you resort to inking a rubber stamp. And I wanted to emphasize the fail tbh.
Muh rubber stamps
My understanding is that the insurance program covering the buildings had a $3.5B per occurrence limit which would have been sufficient except most of the insurance carriers successfully argued in court that even though it was two separate planes, it was one singular terrorist attack and thus one occurrence.
The attack also occurred a day or two after the insurance policies were renewed, meaning the full policies had not been finalized yet and there was only an insurance binder on the buildings which is a lot less enforceable than a full policy.
In essence, if the intent was insurance fraud, it was horribly executed
My understanding is that the insurance program covering the buildings had a $3.5B per occurrence limit which would have been sufficient except most of the insurance carriers successfully argued in court that even though it was two separate planes, it was one singular terrorist attack and thus one occurrence.
The attack also occurred a day or two after the insurance policies were renewed, meaning the full policies had not been finalized yet and there was only an insurance binder on the buildings which is a lot less enforceable than a full policy.
In essence, if the intent was insurance fraud, it was horribly executed
not to mention he had to pay rent on the site for the entire time there were no tenants in the buildings and no buildings.
We read your repeated speech.
Are you ready to move on to actual discussion of your doubts regarding the generally accepted version of events?
I am.
You should read the "no demolition cord being found in the rubble" conspiracies. They're ing hilarious. Many demolition experts say that miles and miles and miles of detcord would have to be used...and would have survived the collapse. Videos of other controlled demolitions show people pulling all of that cord out of the rubble for environmental reasons. That stuff can't be disposed of in the same fashion as the other rubble....so they must manually go in and remove it by hand.
Im ready to admit that the number of unanswered questions...questions that neither of us can answer in our lifetimes...is itself a tragedy. And its by design.
All of the "questions" have already been answered by science, evidence, and common ing sense.
What's tragic is that political correctness and SJW-ism are at such an all-time high that people will believe the most preposterous theories as long as they can blame Republicans instead of Muslim terrorists for 9/11.
Are you ready to move on to actual discussion of your doubts regarding the generally accepted version of events?
I am.
Explain the holes in Lear's affidavit. Not an attack on his character. But explain how the pilots defeat the obstacles that he laid out. The maneuvers. The speed limitations. The pit conditions.
Ill wait.
I posted pilot Ryan Mackey's rebuttal years ago in the thread you linked.
Did you not read it?
I've been waiting for you to read it for years.
Here it is again. Please read it this time.
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/show...=1#post6834586
Im sure I did. Im sure I responded. Ill check into this.
Thanks for your patience over these last few years.
You actually didn't read it or the other do ent i posted in the thread. You proved that several times over in that "discussion."
Well, in that case youve been a real trooper.
Ok so the doc you posted in the thread dealt with one of the three. What about the buzzers, the controls, the lack of room for error? Feel free to use your own words.
I stick with my original response...that was a single point addressed by Lear. The rest was character assassination by rubber stamp.
Is Lear the guy who is mentioning that the planes were "holograms"?
He was the guy who had inside knowledge of CIA operations, after flying for them for decades.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote